British boffins say aircraft could fly on trash, cutting pollution debt by 80%
- Reference: 1697527809
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/10/17/sustainable_jet_fuel/
- Source link:
Boffins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS) and the University of Manchester [1]testing various blends of traditional jet fuel and SAF said preliminary data shows that airline travel might not such a guilty trip over pollution due to more efficient engine controls.
According to their research, emissions of ultrafine black carbon at low thrust were 45 percent less in number and 80 percent less in mass for every kilogram of blended SAF. It get better at higher-altitude flight, said Dr Paul Williams, an NCAS researcher based at the University of Manchester.
[2]
"While an aircraft is cruising there would be less non-volatile particulate matter produced, which in turn impacts contrail formation," Williams said. "This could have the potential to reduce the climate warming effects of aviation globally."
[3]
[4]
SAFs are primarily made from corn and other crops, but waste resources have also been converted into synthetic jet fuel. The US Department of Energy (DoE) [5]lists wood mill waste, agricultural residues, fats and greases, municipal solid waste, and other less-than-appealing sources as possible base materials for SAF.
Crucially, SAFs can replace traditional jet fuel, meaning existing aircraft can use it without the need to rework their existing hardware.
[6]
Williams said the findings also point to improved air quality near airports, where much of the ultrafine black carbon from commercial jets settles as they idle at low thrust before takeoff. Williams told The Register that SAF/petroleum blends with lower aromatic content produce less soot, and those with lower sulfur content produce less volatile particles, which he said is consistent with other research into SAFs.
Is a sustainable aviation future possible?
Aviation regulators in the US have [7]committed to building a net-zero aviation system by 2050, which the US said will require a sharp uptick in SAF production. According to the DoE, while the US has enough resources to meet its goal of phasing out fossil fuels from the aviation industry by 2050, the UK might not have the same advantage.
A [8]report from the Royal Society released earlier this year concluded that the UK would need to devote half of its existing farmland to SAF production, or more than double its renewable electricity supply, to meet net zero aviation goals.
[9]Pull jet fuel from thin air? We can do that, say scientists
[10]Boeing takes flight in sustainability battle with carbon data cruncher
[11]Climate change prevention plans 'way off track', says UN
[12]NASA to tear the wings off plane in the name of sustainability
"Producing enough SAF will be a challenge," Williams told us. He noted that there are several technologies in the pipeline that could help the aviation industry become sustainable, like hydrogen-fueled and electric aircraft, but those technologies are still in their early days of development.
"There are a lot of hurdles here, not just with generation and supply but the associated infrastructure," Williams said in an email. "I don't think there is the data yet to say whether aviation is on track or not."
Rolls-Royce and Easyjet tested the [13]world's first hydrogen aviation engine late last year, but the test was stationary and no timetable for getting the engine flying has been established. Airbus has since joined the project, with plans to get a hydrogen-powered jet in service [14]by 2035 it's hoped.
As for hybrid and electric aircraft, those are being [15]developed as well, but [16]delays abound , among them concerns that battery technology simply isn't efficient enough to make the [17]weight trade-off worth it. Batteries are just too heavy to give electric airplanes enough range at the moment and can be a serious fire risk if not properly managed, as Boeing found out when its [18]entire fleet of 787 aircraft was briefly grounded after two aircraft had the worst kind of smoking on board. ®
Get our [19]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/using-sustainable-aviation-fuels-could-reduce-emissions-by-up-to-80-scientists-find/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/research&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZS5bSLsWhAocv@fWJFJnDAAAAA8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/research&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZS5bSLsWhAocv@fWJFJnDAAAAA8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/research&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZS5bSLsWhAocv@fWJFJnDAAAAA8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.energy.gov/eere/bioenergy/sustainable-aviation-fuels
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/research&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZS5bSLsWhAocv@fWJFJnDAAAAA8&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.faa.gov/sustainability
[8] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/feb/28/scientists-uk-aviation-net-zero-ambitions-half-farmland-double-renewable-electricity
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/04/solar_hydrocarbon_production/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/18/boeing_sustainability_tool/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/14/climate_change_prevention_plans_way/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/14/nasa_boeing_xplane/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/29/rollsroyce_easyjet_hydogen_engine/
[14] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/airbus-easyjet-rolls-royce-join-forces-uk-hydrogen-powered-flying-2023-09-05/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/16/electric_commercial_plane_2028/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/18/nasa_electrified_aircraft_propulsion_audit/
[17] https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/08/17/1058013/electric-planes-taking-off-challenges/
[18] https://www.theregister.com/2013/01/17/faa_grounds_boeing_787_batteries/
[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: more BS university studies
I think the best part is-
SAFs are primarily made from corn and other crops , but waste resources have also been converted into synthetic jet fuel.
So another wizard wheeze to turn food into fuel, increasing the cost of both. And if it's like other biofuels, it'll reduce the efficiency as well. And sure, if you can seperate out other waste resources and feed them into digestors, that can work. Assuming you can get enough, at a low enough cost and they're clean enough. Alternatively, we could just be burning that in CHP plants and call it good. A much cheaper way to convert wast into power, but loony Greens don't want it because 'innovators' can't make as much money from it.
My local council's just given everyone 5 new wheelie bins because sorting waste into more categories that burns & doesn't burn is too easy.
Re: more BS university studies
And also "the UK would need to devote half of its existing farmland to SAF production".
Ummm, that sounds like a really bad idea, given there are large chunks of UK farmland that aren't suitable for growing crops like corn. We already import food because we don't grow enough to feed our population, so decreasing food production is going to *increase* the quantity of imported food and therefore make the situation worse, meaning more land needs to be converted into growing biofuel crops, and so on...
Synthetic fuels could well be the future of aviation, (and the future of keeping vintage ICE cars running) but biofuels from crops grown in fields are not the answer. What happened to the concept of fuel made from vat grown algae?
All air travel, passenger and cargo, is 2% of carbon emissions. Aluminium, steel and concrete production is 12-16%. Of course we should be reducing emissions everywhere we can but do you ever get the feeling like we're being misdirected?
Its an easy target as you can make the claim that the people flying are 'wealthy' and therefore the protesters are 'punching up'.
There're already quite detailed, workable plans to decarbonise aluminium, steel and concrete production in the UK (not just by continuing to outsource the emissions overseas! - primarily by electrifying their energy usage). Air travel remains an outlier because you can't just wave wind turbines and battery storage at the bulk of the problem.
Fly high, see other continents!
Before we’re reduced to the rural lifestyle being planned by our betters.
(Joke Alert)
That's no joke. It's the actual plan.
The step after is to make sure we all contribute in serf days to building the castle walls of the places our "betters" will be living.
Betteridge's Law of Headlines
"Is a sustainable aviation future possible?"
No. If you're burning something to do a thing, you're doing it wrong. This is still producing pollution, just at a slower rate.
Re: Betteridge's Law of Headlines
Burning something in a gas turbine has a much better energy per unit mass of fuel compared to a battery. For the foreseeable future, aircraft will be burning fuel rather than running on batteries, except for some "short hop" routes, like small planes operating between closely spaced islands. The alternative is to build a lot more high speed rail, including tunnels that are thousands of miles long under the oceans, and that's not going to happen, because the delay between the money spent to build it and recovering the costs will be more than a human lifetime for long routes.
Meanwhile out in reality
Velcocys shares have absolutely collapsed. That's the market telling you about the future value of the company...
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=573962864&q=LON:+VLS&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgecRozi3w8sc9YSm9SWtOXmPU4OIKzsgvd80rySypFJLiYoOyBKT4uHj00_UNjcoKMyzTStJ4FrFy-Pj7WSmE-QQDABKVkctHAAAA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjd2-X82vyBAxXimGoFHbfRAPAQsRV6BAhKEAM&biw=1912&bih=932&dpr=1
Re: Meanwhile out in reality
Interesting comment.
The article does not mention Velcocys anywhere.
Care to explain why you mention a company with a dismal stock price as a counterargument when said company has not been referenced by the article ?
I mean, Renault isn't doing too well at the moment either, but I fail to see how that has anything to do with potentially making fuel out of trash.
Because if we can make jet fuel out of trash and lower our carbon emission, I'm all for it. It'll help solve two problems at once.
Not holding my breath though . . .
Corn source a bad sign
Corn-based biofuels can take more fossil fuel to make than they can replace. Maybe it's just the way they do it in the US, but I get twitchy when someone suggests something that could lead to an expanded use of that particular boondoggle. Any sane use of this idea needs to somehow exclude that, and any other means which makes the problem worse IMO.
Why not just cut out the middle man?
Just burn the bovine excrement that these gronks are producing and voila!
Not entirely surprising, Jet fuel is a bit like diesel and waste cooking oil can be used as an alternative fuel in some diesel engines.
And it would be an improvement if the air in Hounslow starting smelling and tasting like chips instead of Avgas.
Who left the gate open?
Fueling jets with municipal solid waste reminded when I was a student many years ago of someone suggesting jumbo jets (Boeing 747s) could fly on coke (as in steel making not the Columbian sort.) I can imagine academia being what it is, this individual has clambered up the greasy pole and might be responsible for this.
I would thought the local chippy's used frying oil might be a better bet. In most parts of the world it would be vegetable oil so by definition a biofuel. (Some independence minded parts of the UK might use solid paraffin.)
more BS university studies
from academics who have knowledge of only a fraction of what is needed to run an industry like aviation. And even then, laced with "could", "has the potential to", yada yada.